Forum Help

If you want to ask about changing your username, have login problems, have password problems or a technical issue please email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

Posting help:

If you want to ask why a word can't be typed, your signature's been changed, or a post has been deleted see the Forum Rules. If you don't find the answer you can ask forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com though due to volumes we can't guarantee replies.

I was wondering if I could get some advice about a claim form that has been sent to me. I am completely baffled by this letter and I have no idea as to how I should go about dealing with this. The letters have been escalating as time has passed and I have ignored it to the stage where the claimant, Parking Control Management, have used the solicitors Gladstones to send additional charges. The county court business center is listed at the top of the page with a claim number and issue date of when the letter had been sent. I write to you in urgency as there is interest on my current charges at 8%pa with the total amount set at £239.
I would like to add that I received a paper ticket on my windscreen in a private residential area (Salisbury village in 2016) and I am not the keeper of the vehicle although it is addressed to the keeper.

I am not sure if it is a court hearing. I've received four pages with one of the pages asking me to log into moneyclaim.gov .uk to respond to the claim... I am worried that if I log in I have given acknowledgement to my parking error and they will be able to take me to court... The other three pages are a "response pack" with the headings titled "acknowledgement of service", "Admission (specified amount)" & "defence and counterclaim (specified amount)".

I've always gone under the assumption of if I ignore the letters nothing would come about on my head but reading the newbies forum I see now that this is not the case

I would appreciate any help you guys could give me because I'd be completely lost (and scared) if I ended up in court...

What you have to do now is detailed in the NEWBIES FAQ sticky, post #2.

We cannot provide you with a silver bullet to get you out of this. You have to be in for the long run, and need to involve yourself in research and work for you to get rid of this. It is not simple. We will help, but can't do it for you.

Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.

the ability to pay (or not) is irrelevant , read the BARGEPOLE post about useless defences

same applies to not receiving letters , all the claimant has to do is prove they posted them (like a free certificate of posting) , plus they may need to prove they had the correct address

this is already a live court case, they filed the fee with MCOL and so you (or the ACTUAL KEEPER) have the MCOL papers , so acknowledge online to gain an extra 14 days to defend it

you (or more likely the keeper) need to draft a defence for this live court claim , so read post #2 of the NEWBIES sticky thread and get a shift on, the clock is already ticking , so tempus fugit

the person named on the MCOL needs to defend this , although other people may be able to do so on their behalf, but the KEEPER is being taken to court , make no mistake

so YOU did not receive this court claim, the keeper (the person named on the papers) received this court claim, its nothing to do with YOU if I am correct in what I read in post #1 (that YOU are not the keeper)

Last edited by Redx; 26-05-2017 at 6:25 PM.

Newbies !!
Private Parking ticket? check the 2 sticky threads by coupon-mad and crabman in the Parking Tickets, Fines & Parking Board forum for the latest advice or maybe try pepipoo or C.A.G. or legal beagles forums if you need legal advice as well because this parking forum is not about debt collectors or legal matters per se

Once you've read post #2 of the NEWBIES thread, and read it again (there's a lot to take in), use the search function to search terms such as 'Gladstones defence' or parking control management' etc. This will bring up other similar threads.

Use the info to build your own defence and post your draft here for review.

So I've finished my acknowledgement of service and I am unsure of what I should do next. I've used the robo..bmpa link to create a defence (I think) and it states as follows:

"IN THE COUNTY COURT
BETWEEN :
AND
Parking Control Management
NAME NAME
DEFENCE
CLAIM NO. D7GF9H78
Claimant
Defendant
Introduction
1. I am NAME NAME, the defendant in this matter. My address for service is ADDRESS ADDRESS
2. This is my statement of truth and my defence.
3. As an unrepresented litigant-in-person I seek the Court's permission to amend and supplement this defence as may be required upon disclosure of the claimant's case.
4. For the avoidance of doubt on the relevant date I was the registered keeper of a CAR, registered number REGISTRATION REGISTRATION.
5. It is believed that it will be a matter of common ground that the purported debt arose as the result of the issue of a parking charge notice in relation to an alleged breach of the terms and conditions by the driver of the above vehicle when it was parked at Salisbury Village on 16/12/2016.
Purported Basis of Claim
6. Further based upon the scant and deficient details contained in the Particulars of Claim and correspondence, it appears to be the claimant's case that:
a. There was a contract formed by the defendant and the claimant on 16/12/2016. b. There was an agreement to pay a sum or parking charge
c. That there were Terms and Conditions prominently displayed around the site

d. That in addition to the Parking charge there was an agreement to pay additional and unspecified additional sums.
e. The claimant company fully complied with their obligations within the terms of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
f. The claimant company fully complied with their obligations within the International Parking Community Code of Practice of which they were member at the time.
g. Further that the defendant has not paid the alleged debt.
Rebuttal of Claim
7. It is denied that:
a. A contract was formed
b. There was an agreement to pay a parking charge.
c. That there were Terms and Conditions prominently displayed around the site.
d. That in addition to the Parking charge there was an agreement to pay additional and unspecified additional sums.
e. The claimant company fully complied with their obligations within the terms of Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
f. The claimant company fully complied with their obligations within the International Parking Community Code of Practice of which they were member at the time.
g. That I am liable for the purported debt.
8. It is further denied that I owe any debt to the claimant or that any debt is in fact owed or that any debt exists or could ever exist or has ever existed. That in any event the claimant has failed to comply with the requirements of the Civil Procedure Rules and that their claim is both unfounded and vexatious.
9. The claimant is put to the strictest proof of their assertions.
My Defence
10. My defence will rely principally upon the following points:
11. That the signs erected on site are incapable of forming the basis of a contract and indeed make it clear that that is not the case. Further it is trite law that a term that is forbidding cannot also constitute an offer. It is therefore denied that any contract was formed or was capable of being formed.

12. Should the claimant rely on the case of ParkingEye v Beavis, I wish to point out that there is a test of good faith.
Para 205: “The requirement of good faith in this context is one of fair and open dealing. Openness requires that the terms should be expressed fully, clearly and legibly, containing no concealed pitfalls or traps. Appropriate prominence should be given to terms which might operate disadvantageously to the customer.”
13. Underlining that is Section B.2.1, B.2.2 of the IPC Code of Practice which gives clear instructions as to the placing, visibility and clarity of any signs that are used to form contracts. It says:
2.1 Where the basis of your parking charges is based in the law of contract it will usually be by way of the driver of a vehicle agreeing to contractual terms identified by signage in and around a controlled zone. It is therefore of fundamental importance that the signage meets the minimum standards under The Code as this underpins the validity of any such charge. Similarly, where charges are founded in the law of trespass and form liquidated damages, these too must be communicated to drivers in the same way.
2.2 Signs must conform to the requirements as set out in a schedule 1 to the Code
14. The defendant refutes that there were clear and visible signs, with Terms that formed the basis of a contact and which met the specifications above.
15. Section B.1.1 of the IPC Code of Practice outlines to operators:
1.1 If you operate parking management activities on land which is not owned by you, you must supply us with written authority from the land owner sufficient to establish you as the “Creditor” within the meaning of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (where applicable) and in any event to establish you as a person who is able to recover parking charges. There is no prescribed form for such agreement and it need not necessarily be as part of a contract but it must include the express ability for an operator to recover parking charges on the landowner's behalf or provide sufficient right to occupy the land in question so that charges can be recovered by the operator directly. This applies whether or not you intend to use the keeper liability provisions.
The Claimant is put to strict proof they have such authority to operate on site and to take action in their own name. The same is a requirement of any contract based on conduct.
16. If in the alternative it is the claimant's case that his claim is founded in trespass (which is in any event denied) then in a car park setting any damages in trespass can only be assessed based on a calculation of the proportion of income lost based on the time of the alleged occupation. Any sum sought could therefore only be minimal and de-minimis.
17. That the amount demanded is therefore excessive and unconscionable and especially so when compared to the level of Penalty Charge Notice issued by the local Council which is set at £50 or £25 if paid within 14 days.
18. In the alternative, the attention of the court is drawn to para. 4(5) Schedule 4 Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 which sets out that the maximum amount recoverable from the registered keeper, where the keeper liability provisions have been properly invoked (which is expressly denied in this

Powered by TCPDF
case) is that amount specified in the Notice to Keeper (whether issued in accordance with paras 8(2)c; 8(2)d, 9(2)c or 9(2)d of the Act).
19. In view of all the foregoing the court is invited to strike the matter out of its own motion.
20. The claimant is put to strict proof of the assertions they have made or may make in their fuller claim.
This statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signed ______________________
Dated 26-05-2017
V1.01/2017"

Must I post this somewhere on the MCOL website or do I wait for them to sent me a letter? I read on the NEWBIES thread that there is a Directions Questionnaire must I complete this now and if so where would I find this?

During my research I also came across a post about requesting personal info. Must I also request this to help with my defence?

Might just be me, but I don't much like defences that have that list in 7a-g, in particular the above sentence. It repeats 'that' but apart from that minor issue, it also reads oddly to me, as if you are stating their case for them and on a skim read it sounds like the defendant is admitting they are liable, which is the opposite of the intention.

Hi all please look at my revised defence:
"1. I am the Defendant, xxxxx, DOB xx/xx/xxxx, and reside at xxxxxxxxx

2. Save as specifically admitted in this defence the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the Particulars of Claim, or implied in Pre action correspondence.

3. The Claimant!!!8217;s Particulars of Claim disclose no legal cause of action and they are embarrassing to the Defendant as the Claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16 and practice direction 16 7.5. In this regard I wish to draw the Courts attention to the following matters;

(a) The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the any agreement. the method the Claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, how they became due, or any other matters necessary to substantiate the Claimant's claim.

(b) The over riding objective of the CPRs dictates that the case should be handled at a proportionate cost. The defendant recognises this duty and refrains from making an application for summary judgement at a cost which exceeds the claims value but asks the court to strike the claim out under it!!!8217;s powers, of it!!!8217;s own motion as several Judges across the country have already done.

4. The defendant was the registered keeper on the material dates. The claimant is put to strict proof of who was driving.

5. The claimants notice to keepers do not comply with the protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4 paragraph 8 including but not limited to 2(f).

6. The signs used by the claimant cannot constitute a contract as they are prohibitive or forbidding and do not have the necessary requirements of a contract, offer, acceptance and consideration. The supreme court stated in Parking Eye v Beavis that only the land owner/occupier could sue for trespass.

7. The signs are not clear, prominent and legible as per Parking Eye v Beavis. They cannot create a contract. The charge is buried in the small print and is an unfair term. The signs were sparse.

8. The signs attempt to create a distance contract but are unenforceable as they do not contain the correct cancellation information required by the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation And Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

9. The claimant is put to strict proof that they are entitled to £239.39 plus interest as claimed.

10. It is denied that any contract was entered in to between myself and the claimant or that I have any liability in this matter.

11. Should the claimants try to make a case via witness statement I request the claim is adjourned at the claimants expense to enable a full particularised defence to be entered.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true."

I would like to add that I have been back to the site where I was parked and noticed that new signs have been put up where they had not been previously. Is there any way I can add this to my defence?

Hi all please look at my revised defence:
"1. I am the Defendant, xxxxx, DOB xx/xx/xxxx, and reside at xxxxxxxxx

2. Save as specifically admitted in this defence the Defendant denies each and every allegation set out in the Particulars of Claim, or implied in Pre action correspondence.

3. The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim disclose no legal cause of action and they are embarrassing to the Defendant as the Claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16 and practice direction 16 7.5. In this regard I wish to draw the Courts attention to the following matters;

(a) The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the any agreement. the method the Claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, how they became due, or any other matters necessary to substantiate the Claimant's claim.

(b) The over riding objective of the CPRs dictates that the case should be handled at a proportionate cost. The defendant recognises this duty and refrains from making an application for summary judgement at a cost which exceeds the claims value but asks the court to strike the claim out under it’s powers, of it’s own motion as several Judges across the country have already done.

4. The defendant was the registered keeper on the material dates. The claimant is put to strict proof of who was driving.

5. The claimants notice to keepers do not comply with the protection of freedoms act 2012 schedule 4 paragraph 8 including but not limited to 2(f).

6. The signs used by the claimant cannot constitute a contract as they are prohibitive or forbidding and do not have the necessary requirements of a contract, offer, acceptance and consideration. The supreme court stated in Parking Eye v Beavis that only the land owner/occupier could sue for trespass.

7. The signs are not clear, prominent and legible as per Parking Eye v Beavis. They cannot create a contract. The charge is buried in the small print and is an unfair term. The signs were sparse.

8. The signs attempt to create a distance contract but are unenforceable as they do not contain the correct cancellation information required by the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation And Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

9. The claimant is put to strict proof that they are entitled to £239.39 plus interest as claimed.

10. It is denied that any contract was entered in to between myself and the claimant or that I have any liability in this matter.

11. Should the claimants try to make a case via witness statement I request the claim is adjourned at the claimants expense to enable a full particularised defence to be entered.

Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true."

I would like to add that I have been back to the site where I was parked and noticed that new signs have been put up where they had not been previously. Is there any way I can add this to my defence?

How this site works

We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of the site. We're a journalistic website and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques, but can't guarantee to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.

This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances and remember we focus on rates not service.

Do note, while we always aim to give you accurate product info at the point of publication, unfortunately price and terms of products and deals can always be changed by the provider afterwards, so double check first.

We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned (how likely they are to go bust), but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the Section 75 guide for protection tips).

We often link to other websites, but we can't be responsible for their content.

Always remember anyone can post on the MSE forums, so it can be very different from our opinion.

MoneySavingExpert.com is part of the MoneySupermarket Group, but is entirely editorially independent. Its stance of putting consumers first is protected and enshrined in the legally-binding MSE Editorial Code.